Safety culture in the construction industry varies significantly across organizations. While national culture plays a role, local organizational cultures—shaped by leadership, workforce composition, and industry norms—play a more direct role in determining safety performance. Using Geert Hofstede’s six dimensions of culture alongside the Onion Model (Artifacts, Values, and Assumptions), we can better understand these differences.
- Power Distance (PDI): Indian construction sites typically exhibit high power distance, where workers often hesitate to question authority. This can impact safety when hierarchical barriers discourage reporting unsafe practices. Organizations with lower power distance foster open reporting and participatory safety programs, making workplaces safer.
- Individualism vs. Collectivism (IDV): Indian workplaces lean towards collectivism, where workers rely on group norms and peer influence. While this can promote teamwork, it may also discourage individuals from speaking up about safety violations if they fear social isolation. Safety-driven organizations leverage collectivism by fostering peer-led safety initiatives.
- Masculinity vs. Femininity (MAS): The Indian construction sector is traditionally masculine, emphasizing productivity over well-being. This often results in a ‘get the job done’ mentality that overlooks safety. Organizations shifting towards a more balanced approach (e.g., recognizing mental well-being and work-life balance) tend to have stronger safety cultures.
- Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI): Indian workers generally have moderate to high uncertainty avoidance, favoring structured procedures. However, a lack of clear communication and ad-hoc decision-making often undermines safety policies. Organizations that provide consistent training and structured safety protocols align better with workers’ preference for predictability.
- Long-Term vs. Short-Term Orientation (LTO): Many Indian construction companies focus on short-term project deadlines, sometimes at the expense of safety. Companies with a long-term orientation invest in sustainable safety training, continuous improvement, and proactive hazard identification.
- Indulgence vs. Restraint (IVR): In high-restraint environments, employees may feel restricted in expressing concerns, leading to unreported safety incidents. Organizations that encourage open communication and reward proactive safety behavior foster a more positive safety culture.
- Artifacts (Visible Elements): These include PPE usage, signage, safety drills, and incident reporting mechanisms. Some organizations emphasize compliance by making safety measures highly visible, while others treat them as formalities.
- Values (Shared Principles): An organization’s commitment to safety is reflected in its leadership’s approach. Companies that embed safety into their core values prioritize training, empower workers, and integrate safety in project planning.
- Assumptions (Unconscious Beliefs): Deep-rooted beliefs about risk-taking, authority, and responsibility shape safety culture. If safety is seen as a ‘cost’ rather than an investment, unsafe behaviors persist despite visible artifacts.
Companies vary widely in their safety culture based on these dimensions. A multinational firm with lower power distance may encourage whistleblowing, while a local contractor with high power distance may expect blind compliance. Similarly, an organization valuing long-term planning will invest in safety innovations, whereas one with a short-term focus may cut corners.
By analyzing safety culture through Hofstede’s dimensions and the Onion Model, organizations can identify gaps and implement tailored interventions. Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, Indian construction firms must recognize that local organizational culture—beyond national trends—plays a defining role in safety outcomes.
